업무상횡령등
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Punishment of the crime
The Defendant served as the deputy head of the Victim C Co., Ltd. located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government from September 2009 to April 2013, 2013, and has been engaged in the sales and collection of alcoholic beverages.
around July 5, 2012, the Defendant collected loans of one million won from the F cafeteria operated by E in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, to the Defendant’s wife G account (H) and used loans for personal purposes, such as funds for the operation of the alcohol house operated by the Defendant in mind and expenses for charging Internet gambling money.
In addition, from around that time to April 2013, the Defendant consumed 21,981,350 won in total by the same method 14 times as indicated in the annexed crime list.
Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.
The Defendant, from November 2013, 2013, told the victim K which is planning to invest in the business partner while working as the business director at a limited liability company, a comprehensive liquor wholesale company located I located in Gyeonggi-do, which is located in the Seoul Metropolitan City, to acquire money by deceiving the victim K.
On December 16, 2013, the Defendant stated, at the above company office, that “The Defendant loaned KRW 30 million to the Plaintiff at no interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free interest-free
However, in fact, the Defendant was able to grant a loan to the company up to KRW 25 million, and there was no need for a separate deposit, and even if receiving money from the victim, it was thought that it will be used as personal debt repayment and living expenses, etc., so there was no intention or ability to grant a loan of KRW 30 million exceeding KRW 25 million as agreed.
Accordingly, the defendant deceivings the victim as above and belongs to it from the victim.